If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suggestions for future versions
Individual ideas on one subject should still be posted in the wishlist thread, however if you want to discuss your idea with others please create your own thread. Please name your topics sensibly and give an indication of what it is about.
For general ideas or a list please use this Wishlist topic. You can view some older suggestions here

Right, to give this thread the background it requires i will first outline what i consider to be the main controls on finishing (this will become relevant later on, those of you who are familiar with my posying style will know this could go on...);

1 - Player ability - obviously a league 1 striker will score fewer than a premiership striker against opponents of the same ability.

For the purposes of this experiment i assume that the chances are being created for the striker, and as such, the most relevant stats should be, finishing, composure and decisions.

2 - Tempo - if i play a high tempo, i would expect chances to be rushed, if i play a low tempo, i would expect chances to be taken when the best opportunity presents itself - granted this is linked to decisions.

3 - Time wasting - some users suggest that this controls how long a player dwells on the ball as well as things like slow free kicks, hences, high time wasting should link to a low tempo, and provide more clinical finishing.

4 - Mentality - an attacking mentality should be focused on getting the ball forward - this should not create the best chances, just more of them. A more defensive mentality should wait for chances to appear, rather than forcing the game.

Right, that was just to outline my train of thought when comparing finishing rates in the following, and to point out the basic sort of tactics employed.

Llamas look away now

In a nutshell, the tactics involve low tempo, short passing, marginally above norm mentality, and mid-high time wasting.

Llamas can come in again

The point of this? I've seen several threads complaining that the AI "cracks" their tactics, and the less educated threads along the lines of "the AI cheats". Due to the fact i usually employ a 3 formation rotation i did not notice this greatly, but there were uncharecteristic slumps that i had no way of explaining. So i decided to investigate. Before an SI employee comes on here telling me i should just play the game, i would do except it's not much fun right now.

So, i started a league as chelsea (holidayed one season to remove the interferance of the african cup of nations - would mess up results spectacularly) and used only the one tactic.

Compare and contrast the above results with what happened between february and march (it all seemed to even out again in april after the league had closed up a bit).

Average Human Shots per game: 21 - 23% less than pre feb

Average Human Shots on target p/g: 11.8 - 29% less than pre-feb

Average Human Goals p/g: 0.85 - 65% less than pre-feb

Average AI Shots p/g: 7 - 18% less than pre-feb

Average AI SOT p/g: 3 - 43% less than pre-feb

Average AI Goals p/g: 0.6 - 172% more than pre-feb

Average possesion was again 62% in favour of the user.

So what can be deduced from these results?

Firstly, it must be said that the quality of chances was broadly similar throughtout the season (due to the fact the AI scored so infrequently it was easy to review each goal).
Secondly the pattern continued in cup competitions, however, due to the vastly fluctuating quality of teams faced, i chose to omit cup results.

So in essence, when the AI *cracked* my tactics, the following happened;

A) The user had vastly more possession than the AI.

B) The number of chances for both teams decreased.

C) The users finishing decreased markedly.

D) The AIs finishing incresed by 170%

E) The user still had SUBSTANTIALLY more SOTs than the AI, from positions of similar quality.

Now, points B and C are what i would WANT to see form the AI as it countered a succesful tactic. In principal, the AI should try and close games down and make them as tight as possible.
My main issues lie with the fact that despite finishing ability of the strikers remaining constant (and morale remaining high in the case of user and often low in case of AI) the % of chances converted was phenomenally increased for the AI.

Possible explanations:

1) - Complacency. It could be argued that having won so many games in a row the users players lost the desire to win. I pick ONLY players with high work rate and a determined personality to specifically avoid this.

2) - Weather. The reduction in chances created could be due to the poorer weather during feb-march, however this does not explain the changes in finishing.

I am all for the AI figuring out how to beat tactics - it's realistic above all - HOWEVER, just for once, i would like to be outplayed, rather than the finishing ability of agbonlahor, aliadiere et al suddenly rocket.

If anybody wants to retry this experiment i can upload my tactics (or maybe if anybody just wants a devastatingly effective tactic for 6 months lol).

Appologies if it seems that all my threads are monas, it's just that i would like to see the game progress, and i feel that constructive criticism is the only way to achieve this.

Again, a well done to those that read this.
All useful comments would be appreciated.

Right, to give this thread the background it requires i will first outline what i consider to be the main controls on finishing (this will become relevant later on, those of you who are familiar with my posying style will know this could go on...);

1 - Player ability - obviously a league 1 striker will score fewer than a premiership striker against opponents of the same ability.

For the purposes of this experiment i assume that the chances are being created for the striker, and as such, the most relevant stats should be, finishing, composure and decisions.

2 - Tempo - if i play a high tempo, i would expect chances to be rushed, if i play a low tempo, i would expect chances to be taken when the best opportunity presents itself - granted this is linked to decisions.

3 - Time wasting - some users suggest that this controls how long a player dwells on the ball as well as things like slow free kicks, hences, high time wasting should link to a low tempo, and provide more clinical finishing.

4 - Mentality - an attacking mentality should be focused on getting the ball forward - this should not create the best chances, just more of them. A more defensive mentality should wait for chances to appear, rather than forcing the game.

Right, that was just to outline my train of thought when comparing finishing rates in the following, and to point out the basic sort of tactics employed.

Llamas look away now

In a nutshell, the tactics involve low tempo, short passing, marginally above norm mentality, and mid-high time wasting.

Llamas can come in again

The point of this? I've seen several threads complaining that the AI "cracks" their tactics, and the less educated threads along the lines of "the AI cheats". Due to the fact i usually employ a 3 formation rotation i did not notice this greatly, but there were uncharecteristic slumps that i had no way of explaining. So i decided to investigate. Before an SI employee comes on here telling me i should just play the game, i would do except it's not much fun right now.

So, i started a league as chelsea (holidayed one season to remove the interferance of the african cup of nations - would mess up results spectacularly) and used only the one tactic.

Compare and contrast the above results with what happened between february and march (it all seemed to even out again in april after the league had closed up a bit).

Average Human Shots per game: 21 - 23% less than pre feb

Average Human Shots on target p/g: 11.8 - 29% less than pre-feb

Average Human Goals p/g: 0.85 - 65% less than pre-feb

Average AI Shots p/g: 7 - 18% less than pre-feb

Average AI SOT p/g: 3 - 43% less than pre-feb

Average AI Goals p/g: 0.6 - 172% more than pre-feb

Average possesion was again 62% in favour of the user.

So what can be deduced from these results?

Firstly, it must be said that the quality of chances was broadly similar throughtout the season (due to the fact the AI scored so infrequently it was easy to review each goal).
Secondly the pattern continued in cup competitions, however, due to the vastly fluctuating quality of teams faced, i chose to omit cup results.

So in essence, when the AI *cracked* my tactics, the following happened;

A) The user had vastly more possession than the AI.

B) The number of chances for both teams decreased.

C) The users finishing decreased markedly.

D) The AIs finishing incresed by 170%

E) The user still had SUBSTANTIALLY more SOTs than the AI, from positions of similar quality.

Now, points B and C are what i would WANT to see form the AI as it countered a succesful tactic. In principal, the AI should try and close games down and make them as tight as possible.
My main issues lie with the fact that despite finishing ability of the strikers remaining constant (and morale remaining high in the case of user and often low in case of AI) the % of chances converted was phenomenally increased for the AI.

Possible explanations:

1) - Complacency. It could be argued that having won so many games in a row the users players lost the desire to win. I pick ONLY players with high work rate and a determined personality to specifically avoid this.

2) - Weather. The reduction in chances created could be due to the poorer weather during feb-march, however this does not explain the changes in finishing.

I am all for the AI figuring out how to beat tactics - it's realistic above all - HOWEVER, just for once, i would like to be outplayed, rather than the finishing ability of agbonlahor, aliadiere et al suddenly rocket.

If anybody wants to retry this experiment i can upload my tactics (or maybe if anybody just wants a devastatingly effective tactic for 6 months lol).

Appologies if it seems that all my threads are monas, it's just that i would like to see the game progress, and i feel that constructive criticism is the only way to achieve this.

Again, a well done to those that read this.
All useful comments would be appreciated.

1) It's not unknown for teams to have a mid-season slump.
2)Strikers can go off the boil.
3) Maybe the more direct approach by lesser teams is better in wintery conditions.
4) One season<>statistical proof.
5)Some of your initial assumptions may be wrong.
6) My perceived slump normally happens in January and I often waltz through Feb and March

I completely agree that unexplainable slumps happen and have experienced the same things as your results suggest. Tactics that have been working well give the same stats (possesion, shots, etc) but give very poor results, how are we supposed to overcome that?

I have to say, I have not taken an equally detailed exploration into this as you have, though I have noticed some of the elements you mention.

Perhaps though I'm fortunate, or possibly even ignorant of these sort of issues, as on the whole it does'nt affect the overall outcomes and enjoyment of the seasons I play.

Constructive criticism/feedback is a good thing, as it will undoubtably be noticed by SI and possibly help them with development for future patches and releases. Without such input, some problem areas might never be seen by the developers, who in fairness are never going to personally explore the fullness of the game in testing, as we the players do.

I only wish that more discussions regarding existing or potential gameplay issues were as thoughtfully posted as your own.

Well thought out post and analysis, but I'd suggest that you're slump is due to the combination of the weather, English fixture congestion around that time of year, and complacency.

Bad weather greatly hampers a more skillful tactic because crisp passes get blown off course or get bogged down in a slushy pitch. You might be able to get around this by changing to a more direct attack.

But the bad weather also requires your players to exert more energy to get the same level of play, hence tiring them out faster. Combine this with the huge fixture congestion in the Dec to Feb months in the English schedule, your players begin to wear down.

Combine this with the physical exertion needed to compete on four fronts, your players begin to struggle with the rigors and stresses of all the competitions. I would imagine that given a decent lead in the league, your players are willing to let a few games slip due to a less than complete physical/mental effort rather than wear themselves out beyond the point of exhaustion.

I don't think I have had a February slump of form in almost 13 seasons. My slump usually happens long before February starts and the team is usually improving once they hit February.

November and December are my worst months, the Christmas/New Year schedule in the English leagues is always a nightmare for me. Too many players get injured due to the number of games. In my current season I had to play 3 games without any strikers as all my forwards at the club were injured, luckily one of my wingers stepped up and scored 6 goals in 4 matches .

Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:
4. The only stat that you posted that would concern me is ..... Average AI Goals p/g: 0.6 - 172% more than pre-feb All the others make senst to me, but this one just seems wrong.

I didn't play this game enough to actually debate about it, but the high percentage here has to do with the number being small (0.22 to 0.6). Since the number you'll be dividing by is quite low, it'll inflate the percentage. Not saying it doesn't happen or that it isn't an issue, but it just looks way worse than it is.

So ignoring the % increase it's an increase from 0.22 goals per game conceded to 0.60 goals per game conceded.

If I look at these 2 stats in isolation I would say that the first figure is the one that is wrong.

As a result of that, I would possibly suggest that rather than the AI *crack* your tactics as seems to be the popular claim in GQ, isn't it more accurate that it's actually sorting it's own tactics out?

Ched. Have you got any other titbits of information that you have held back, such as AI formation and generalpattern of play?

The point of this? I've seen several threads complaining that the AI "cracks" their tactics, and the less educated threads along the lines of "the AI cheats". Due to the fact i usually employ a 3 formation rotation i did not notice this greatly, but there were uncharecteristic slumps that i had no way of explaining. So i decided to investigate. Before an SI employee comes on here telling me i should just play the game, i would do except it's not much fun right now.

lol, there is no reasonable explenation how AI could score 170% more. somebody died there?

I didn't play this game enough to actually debate about it, but the high percentage here has to do with the number being small (0.22 to 0.6). Since the number you'll be dividing by is quite low, it'll inflate the percentage. Not saying it doesn't happen or that it isn't an issue, but it just looks way worse than it is.

1. What about fatigue? Isn't that another reason why there might be a slump in form?

2. Injuries linked a little to fatigue might play their part. For all their World Class players, Chelsea do not exactly have a deep squad in certain areas compared to the likes of the other big 3.

3. In stage 2 you won all 23 games but only scored 55 goals. That's not too many for 23 out of 23. Is there anything to be read into that?

4. The only stat that you posted that would concern me is ..... Average AI Goals p/g: 0.6 - 172% more than pre-feb All the others make senst to me, but this one just seems wrong.

Sorry I have more questions than answers. I must admit that this isn't something that I've come across.

sorry i wasn't exactly clear earlier;

1) If i rotate formations, the slump doesn't happen. Ever. In the past, as soon as i've lost a game i should have won, i revert to my 4-4-2 back up, this was just an experiment to determine whether a lot of peoples gripes are related to AI *cracking* tactics.

2) i thought i'd said it, but anyway, yes i agree that the only stat that is worrying is the finishing one, as i said, i WANT the AI to actively reduce the number of chances in a game as they would IRL, i just don't want aliadiere to behave like henry during that time.

3) As to only 55 in 23, i play conservatively, hence only conceding 5. Perhaps a switch to a more aggressive fmt would have solved this problem, but i wanted to see how the AI behaved against a constant.

As to the others above jimbo (haven't got round to reading down yet..)

Soundian - not sure you've got the right end of the stick. Not saying you're wrong, it's just that it wasn't what i was investigating, and as to only using one season, i've had several where i've experienced similar, just not recorded numbers, so i thought i'd do so here - feel free to do 10 seasons of research for me.

Heath - as you mentioned, the slumps never last long enough to effect overall season results - previous users have suggested it is merely a *leveller* used to close up leagues - i'm not convinced, but i'm not going to entirely rule it out.

Hyperion - i've seen the same slump in climates that are much less varied as the uk - it's just that i never recorded numbers for those - although it was one of my early attempts to justofy it, doesn't explain +170% AI goals tho...

Kataria - on FM07, second season onwards my slumps came around NOV (first season always seemed later) it could just vary from game to game, or be related to weather etc.

Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:
4. The only stat that you posted that would concern me is ..... Average AI Goals p/g: 0.6 - 172% more than pre-feb All the others make senst to me, but this one just seems wrong.

I didn't play this game enough to actually debate about it, but the high percentage here has to do with the number being small (0.22 to 0.6). Since the number you'll be dividing by is quite low, it'll inflate the percentage. Not saying it doesn't happen or that it isn't an issue, but it just looks way worse than it is.

Fair point, i'd like to do more researrch into this, but i am limited somewhat by time.

If it had been a mere 50% increase then i would have explained it away as merely a statistical anomaly, the size does seem to imply a large increase, although how large only repeat exps will uncover i think.

So ignoring the % increase it's an increase from 0.22 goals per game conceded to 0.60 goals per game conceded.

If I look at these 2 stats in isolation I would say that the first figure is the one that is wrong.

As a result of that, I would possibly suggest that rather than the AI *crack* your tactics as seems to be the popular claim in GQ, isn't it more accurate that it's actually sorting it's own tactics out?

Ched. Have you got any other titbits of information that you have held back, such as AI formation and generalpattern of play?

It would be perfect if the AI just sorted itself out, but it just doesn't look that way form watching the matches.

Basically, the changes they seem to make are as follows;

1) increase time wasting - i've seen keepers start "taking time over kicks" form the 8th minute...it makes me weep. Could lead to an increase in finishing, but i use high time wasting so i would hope my finishing % would be higher if this was the cause.

2) More defensiv, and use counter attack. Early season some middling teams (borough, bburn etc) would have a go, mid-late season they are often more conservative - would explain the reduction in chances.

3) Formations appear largely similar. Had to check that one as i couldn't remember.

My main gripe is that the quality of chances is NO DIFFERENT. There are still occasional one-on-ones, but a lot of the shots are from laughable positions, as they were early season.

Similarly the user has vastly more possession and more chances, which is why i find the staggering increase in goals scored by the AI hard to explain.

As ahs been said, it could just be an illusion caused by the small numbers being used, but throughout my FM playing, i've always been able to identify a slump and head it off based on the AIs finishing rocketing.

I think my first ever post here was along the lines of "why does cech let in every shot?" and after much investigation i figured that as soon as he started doing that, a change of tactics stopped it instantly.

As i've said, i'm all for having to change tactics, i would just rather i was outplayed instead of AI finishing going through the roof, with minimal differences to the rest of the AI performance.

Originally posted by wwfan:
Could I ask what your starting reputation was and what it was by Feb?

Equally, how many times did the AI start the game without forward arrows after Jan 30th compared to pre-slump matches?

My starting rep for this exp was "international" - after some foraging, the weaker teams didn't use farrows for their staring fmts. Utd and arsenal did (didn't play liverpool until april when the world had become normal again).

When I go back over the info that you've posted Ched, the fact that you only conceded 5 goals in the opening 32 games really stands out.

What would you say if I suggested that it was the first set of results that was the "freak" set and the "normal" set of results came after?

5 goals conceded in 23 league games is pretty impressive by anyone's standards, never mind a team that is playing in a decent competetive league with a number of teams who score highly from set-pieces.............. [pauses for thought].

Im not here to defend SI, but i think we should take a better look at it. I mean, ok you did a great tactic that suits your players and that makes your boys play well, thats great. But even Chelsea lose sometimes. It could be because of low luck, or maybe because the other team defence couldnt be breaked. It happens. Yesterday I watched a game: Sao Paulo(last brazilian champion, the best defence last season, have Adriano now a great player for Brazil standarts) agains Ituano(Itu who?).
The first thing to notice is that the field is horrible and real small. Sao Paulo keeps the ball the whole game, tryies by all means, but dont seem to be capable to break Ituano's defence. Finally they score one from a direct free kick but Ituano managed to draw on their only attack, on a set pieces.The game ended 1x1 wich is ridiculous because Sao Paulo's players are incredibly better than of Ituano's(Itu who?).
What happened them? Well Sao Paulo is a team made of humans beign. The guys werent on a good day, Ituano was solid at Defence(they may not be good players but with 8-9 guys at defence its hard to go wrong) and got lucky on a Set Piece.
If we were playing we would be pulling our hairs out of our head because it should be a game that we should have easily won by a 3-4 margin. The thing is, in football there are so many variables for a Match Day that your tactics, team morale or team quality sometimes cant make a difference.
I think this "Bad Games" are a plus for realism, the sad thing is that the AI seems to pick not some random games trought the league, as it is supposed to be, but takes an whole month or two, and nothing that is done seems to stop it(even if you change strikers they dont seem to score).

So, yes, the game need improvements, but the real freak result for me is your unbeatble team.

My seasonal slump month is also Late January to Mid February (using default training regimes). This season (2018/19) my Albion Rovers have 'only' won 4, drawn 2 and lost 1 during said period. All my oposition started the match with the plain 442 with MC with back arrow to DMC and lost time from the very start.

Celtic (the only team challenging us for the title) are also suffering it and their results have been poorer than ours, so I guess AI teams also have those seasonal slumps.

In my experience, it's one week before UCL last 16 knockout round starts that the slump ends.

Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:
When I go back over the info that you've posted Ched, the fact that you only conceded 5 goals in the opening 32 games really stands out.

What would you say if I suggested that it was the first set of results that was the "freak" set and the "normal" set of results came after?

5 goals conceded in 23 league games is pretty impressive by anyone's standards, never mind a team that is playing in a decent competetive league with a number of teams who score highly from set-pieces.............. [pauses for thought].

Any difference in the way you conceded from set-pieces during this?

Fair point, although i've played several multiplayer games with chelsea and as such have had time to use this tactic repeatedly, it is generally solid, and will rarely concede more than double figures pre-feb.

As to set pieces, i don't concede very many - from corners i'm generally quite strong (cech, terry, carvalho, drog etc...) and i don't give away too many free kicks (best record in the league actually! shocking considering essien and mikel play...) so they don't account for most of the goals i concede.

Originally posted by Luiz Hemerly:
Im not here to defend SI, but i think we should take a better look at it. I mean, ok you did a great tactic that suits your players and that makes your boys play well, thats great. But even Chelsea lose sometimes. It could be because of low luck, or maybe because the other team defence couldnt be breaked. It happens. Yesterday I watched a game: Sao Paulo(last brazilian champion, the best defence last season, have Adriano now a great player for Brazil standarts) agains Ituano(Itu who?).
The first thing to notice is that the field is horrible and real small. Sao Paulo keeps the ball the whole game, tryies by all means, but dont seem to be capable to break Ituano's defence. Finally they score one from a direct free kick but Ituano managed to draw on their only attack, on a set pieces.The game ended 1x1 wich is ridiculous because Sao Paulo's players are incredibly better than of Ituano's(Itu who?).
What happened them? Well Sao Paulo is a team made of humans beign. The guys werent on a good day, Ituano was solid at Defence(they may not be good players but with 8-9 guys at defence its hard to go wrong) and got lucky on a Set Piece.
If we were playing we would be pulling our hairs out of our head because it should be a game that we should have easily won by a 3-4 margin. The thing is, in football there are so many variables for a Match Day that your tactics, team morale or team quality sometimes cant make a difference.
I think this "Bad Games" are a plus for realism, the sad thing is that the AI seems to pick not some random games trought the league, as it is supposed to be, but takes an whole month or two, and nothing that is done seems to stop it(even if you change strikers they dont seem to score).

So, yes, the game need improvements, but the real freak result for me is your unbeatble team.

Sorry you've not quite got my meaning.

I want chnages in form.
I want unlucky results (althouhg limiting this to a couple a season would be nice SI!)
I want the AI to figure out how to beat me.

My problem here is that they played practically identically, yet past the point of Feb the AIs finishing rocketed.

My seasonal slump month is also Late January to Mid February (using default training regimes). This season (2018/19) my Albion Rovers have 'only' won 4, drawn 2 and lost 1 during said period. All my oposition started the match with the plain 442 with MC with back arrow to DMC and lost time from the very start.

Celtic (the only team challenging us for the title) are also suffering it and their results have been poorer than ours, so I guess AI teams also have those seasonal slumps.

In my experience, it's one week before UCL last 16 knockout round starts that the slump ends.

again, my argument is HOW the slump affects the AI compared to how the slump affects the human.

No slump in form should turn average AI strikers into lethal finishers for a period of months before normal service resumes.

Sorry for multiple posts - i tried to stick them all in one and deleted it, doh.

As to Law_man, i'll get it on here after i've transfered it onto this PC, different comps you see.

Is finding it difficult to settle in the new forum. Is homesick. Is Unsettled.

Posts

16,017

I remember when FM2005 was just released, and one of the SI guys said - "You will no longer win every game in a season, that is now impossible".

Ever since that release, your team will slump somewhere in the middle of the season, I myself always seem to have problems mid Jan to mid Feb.

There's nothing you can do to stop it. Changing tactics doesn't work, rotating in fresh players, even of the same ability, doesn't work, buying in new players doesn't work.

Its just something to accept, or get really annoyed about. Unfortunately I normally fall into category 2 because my team will be doing exceptionally well, and then, like a switch being turned off, we will start to conceded 2/3 goals a game and forgot how to shoot.

I don't think the real problem here is that teams suffer from sudden slumps. In real life, even the best teams have bad days that cannot be explained. And they even have series of bad days without an easy explanation.

In my opinion the biggest problem here is that it is almost impossible to get enough information what is causing these bad results. It would help if our assistant told us his opinions about recent form and what went wrong. For example, he could say that our tactic was too open which led to too many counter attacks by the opponent. Or he could point out that their defence was sitting so deep that our fast strikers didn't have space to run into. Or he could say that our key players seemed tired and demotivated. Or, he could say that we were just very unlucky and we did nothing wrong and it was nothing but a freak result.

Now, it would be up to the manager to do changes in tactic or not to change anything.

Originally posted by Wakers:
I remember when FM2005 was just released, and one of the SI guys said - "You will no longer win every game in a season, that is now impossible".

Ever since that release, your team will slump somewhere in the middle of the season, I myself always seem to have problems mid Jan to mid Feb.

There's nothing you can do to stop it. Changing tactics doesn't work, rotating in fresh players, even of the same ability, doesn't work, buying in new players doesn't work.

Its just something to accept, or get really annoyed about. Unfortunately I normally fall into category 2 because my team will be doing exceptionally well, and then, like a switch being turned off, we will start to conceded 2/3 goals a game and forgot how to shoot.

Do you not see the irony that there is opinion like this and also much opinion that the game is now too easy?

Originally posted by Wakers:
I remember when FM2005 was just released, and one of the SI guys said - "You will no longer win every game in a season, that is now impossible".

Ever since that release, your team will slump somewhere in the middle of the season, I myself always seem to have problems mid Jan to mid Feb.

There's nothing you can do to stop it. Changing tactics doesn't work, rotating in fresh players, even of the same ability, doesn't work, buying in new players doesn't work.

Its just something to accept, or get really annoyed about. Unfortunately I normally fall into category 2 because my team will be doing exceptionally well, and then, like a switch being turned off, we will start to conceded 2/3 goals a game and forgot how to shoot.

Do you not see the irony that there is opinion like this and also much opinion that the game is now too easy?

Maybe the people who think it's too easy have only played until january lol.

Originally posted by TPA:
I don't think the real problem here is that teams suffer from sudden slumps. In real life, even the best teams have bad days that cannot be explained. And they even have series of bad days without an easy explanation.

In my opinion the biggest problem here is that it is almost impossible to get enough information what is causing these bad results. It would help if our assistant told us his opinions about recent form and what went wrong. For example, he could say that our tactic was too open which led to too many counter attacks by the opponent. Or he could point out that their defence was sitting so deep that our fast strikers didn't have space to run into. Or he could say that our key players seemed tired and demotivated. Or, he could say that we were just very unlucky and we did nothing wrong and it was nothing but a freak result.

Now, it would be up to the manager to do changes in tactic or not to change anything.

agree, but I'm not sure what he could suggest after out shooting the other team by 20 shots?

And i must add that TPA is spot on, a useful assman would help quite a lot.

I feel another Ched-thread coming on .

Lol, the thing that's got me most worked up at the moment is board confidence, so that is more likely to be the target of my next thread - has there ever been something that has had so much potential, ruined so badly? (that sentance is probably gramatically horrific, it just doesn't sound right, but you get my meaning)

But yes, there could be one along the lines of assmen and physios, both are overwhelmingly neglected - there was an excellent post regarding physios a couple of weeks ago and its dropped of the boards, similarly there have been a number of points brought up about assmen, but they're spread out all over the place, so god knows what SI have seen or acknowledged

Originally posted by andy139s:
as you said with being in all competitions i just think it might just be that its catching up with the players and there condition might look okay but they will tire quicker as they've played so much

or it could be like all the over versions i've played that at some point in the season teams have a slump

having said that the AI is controlling chelsea in my 1st season game with man utd and at jan 30th this is the league table and the chelsea squad

as in your game they have played p23 w16 d5 l2 gf37 ga6

an average of 1.6 goals a game scored and have conceded on average 0.26 per game

i'm gonna keep an eye on chelsea and see what happens between now and the end of march with the AI in control and see if they have a slump

will post again when i get to end of march to let you know if anything happens to them

Ched, did you conduct the experiment once, or did you repeat it 5-10 times?

If you think it's a pattern within the game you have to repeat it and see the same stats. Otherwise it's just an isolated occurence where things balanced out a biot after you went on an excellent run, as tends to happen.

Originally posted by Dave C:
Ched, did you conduct the experiment once, or did you repeat it 5-10 times?

If you think it's a pattern within the game you have to repeat it and see the same stats. Otherwise it's just an isolated occurence where things balanced out a biot after you went on an excellent run, as tends to happen.

It was a trend i'd noticed previously, but failed to record any numbers.

The numbers were recorded for only the one season, hence it is entirely possible it could be a one off, it's just that i've noticed similar things happen before, just not noted the exact numbers - when i start playing again i will probably do some repeats as i appreciate the numbers lose some of their significance if it's a one off.

I suspect the Feb issue is down to tiredness and exaggerated weather conditions, as my backups are not good enough to rotate (if I want to sustain my form anyway) and imo any kind of weather change has a massive and over-exaggerated effect (as SI always seem to manage to do) depending on your tactics.

I ended my weekend session by giving the lads a couple of days off - so will see what that does.

Regardless I think CM/FM has always seemed to stop insanely good runs in an way that is far too obvious- although its that obvious that I shouldve heeded it after the first poor result!

I hardly believe that the slump is caused by fatigue or weather. I have experienced two slumps in all my seasons so far. One comes about after I have played my 19th league game(midway through the league campaign), the other comes at about the 30-31 game point.

What gets me out of this is a change in tactics. The change is minimal, the formation remains the same, i only change some arrows and some player and team intructions slightly.

What I am doing right now is to play the season like this.

League games 1-19: Tactic A
League games 20-30: Tactic B
League games 31-38: Tactic A

Originally posted by Saumyajit:
I hardly believe that the slump is caused by fatigue or weather. I have experienced two slumps in all my seasons so far. One comes about after I have played my 19th league game(midway through the league campaign), the other comes at about the 30-31 game point.

What gets me out of this is a change in tactics. The change is minimal, the formation remains the same, i only change some arrows and some player and team intructions slightly.

What I am doing right now is to play the season like this.

League games 1-19: Tactic A
League games 20-30: Tactic B
League games 31-38: Tactic A

The slumps are almost non existant using this scheme.

Well I thought it may be weather (in my case)- because I stubbornly refuse to change my game, I like to let the other team worry about me not the other way around.

Maybe its just changing something- anything- gets you out of it.

Whatever it is Ive always found that the game signposts these things- nothing ever seems to be gradual in CM/FM. But I suppose its very hard to make something that within the game mechanics is almost like a switch being turned on saying "random slump" and then make it look natural and organic.

Originally posted by Saumyajit:
I hardly believe that the slump is caused by fatigue or weather. I have experienced two slumps in all my seasons so far. One comes about after I have played my 19th league game(midway through the league campaign), the other comes at about the 30-31 game point.

What gets me out of this is a change in tactics. The change is minimal, the formation remains the same, i only change some arrows and some player and team intructions slightly.

What I am doing right now is to play the season like this.

League games 1-19: Tactic A
League games 20-30: Tactic B
League games 31-38: Tactic A

The slumps are almost non existant using this scheme.

I think i made this point earlier - when i noticed a drop in finishing %, i immediately changed tactics and voila, the slump vanished...

Which is why i suggested that weather and fatigue weren't the main controls.

It could be, however, that my B fmt is simply better suited to grim weather - something i may have to look into.

From what I have seen, it seems if you have a good team/good tactic which gives you consistent results the mid season triggers a slump, and probably it is triggered at a later point as well. When I have played with a not too strng team like Birmingham I have seen the slump happen earlier. But with strong teams like Juventus or Arsenal it seems there is a point beyond which the AI won't let you do well unless you change things. It seems that this is the guard against the employment of a super tactic. The amazing predictability with which this happens at exactly the same point every season makes it hard to think otherwise.

This is manifested in the match engine by factors like your strikers missing one on ones, the AI scoring ratio getting increased, and I dare say, you getting injuries to several players in a particular position.

It would seem that I am a conspiracy theorist, but unfortunately I am yet to see a season that has gone otherwise. If there was an amount of randomness to the occurence of the slump I would have thought otherwise, but what I have seen so dfar, it is largely predictable.

Originally posted by Saumyajit:
I hardly believe that the slump is caused by fatigue or weather. I have experienced two slumps in all my seasons so far. One comes about after I have played my 19th league game(midway through the league campaign), the other comes at about the 30-31 game point.

What gets me out of this is a change in tactics. The change is minimal, the formation remains the same, i only change some arrows and some player and team intructions slightly.

What I am doing right now is to play the season like this.

League games 1-19: Tactic A
League games 20-30: Tactic B
League games 31-38: Tactic A

The slumps are almost non existant using this scheme.

i agree, playing like that is how I took my best results. But often is better playing A-B-A-B more often, not only two changes over all season.

Just dipping into this thread quickly - but one thing you don't seem to have considered is weather ... was the weather considerably different during the two statistical analysis's?

I ask because the tactic I prefer to employ generally does well so long as the pitches are in reasonable condition however if the pitches are muddy it bobgs down and while I still perform 'well' (ie. I'm still in contention for all comps) there is a definite drop off in performance on those pitches.

(My tactic is fairly defensive and aimed at hitting on the break - hence boggy pitches make runs and dribbling harder work which explains my problems in those conditions ... possibly a similar (but potentially different) scenario might explain your issues?)

Originally posted by Marc Vaughan:
Just dipping into this thread quickly - but one thing you don't seem to have considered is weather ... was the weather considerably different during the two statistical analysis's?

I ask because the tactic I prefer to employ generally does well so long as the pitches are in reasonable condition however if the pitches are muddy it bobgs down and while I still perform 'well' (ie. I'm still in contention for all comps) there is a definite drop off in performance on those pitches.

(My tactic is fairly defensive and aimed at hitting on the break - hence boggy pitches make runs and dribbling harder work which explains my problems in those conditions ... possibly a similar (but potentially different) scenario might explain your issues?)

I quote myself:

"2) Weather. The reduction in chances created could be due to the poorer weather..." so yes, it was considered.

My argument is that rain and mud shouldn't make average AI strikers 170% more likely to score.

It would be interesting to see the effects of weather in the AI's finishing as well.

Theoretically, one would assume that weather would affect both the human and the AI finishers. However, we have this 170% increase figure to explain. In other words, when it rains it should rain for both. If the decrease in human efficiency is due, or affected by weather, we should be observing a similar dip in AI teams when affected by bad weather.

Naturally, the obvious counter to this way of thinking is saying that the AI adapts to bad weather and the human doesn't. Or that the AI does a better job at adapting, therefore its finishing does not suffer.

Three problems with this:

1- The way of adapting to bad weather is obviously unclear, since it's evident that few human players manage to overcome this. If the "solution" to bad weather was truly to simply adopt a more direct style, it would've been found and adopted by the playerbase years ago.

2- Depending on what this adaptation actually should be, and how many changes the human player is required to make, it does go quite a bit against the grain of the common wisdom advice (dispensed by the game itself as well in its hints) of giving teams time to gel and understand instructions. We either don't change a thing and let the team gel, or we adapt to bad weather and the game's own advice is just wrong and misleading.

3- As with most other things regarding AI team performance, it does seem an AI team is an AI team, and all AI teams - regardless of their reputation, manager quality and player characteristics - are able to adapt. Reality indicates that this is not so, and all around the world teams will find it more or less challenging to adapt. No two teams are the same. However, in FM, all AI teams seem to know how to do it.

The 170% figure, despite all this, is troubling whether it is weather-related or not. It's a huge disparity that makes no sense, nor has any correlation to real life, observable football.

1- The way of adapting to bad weather is obviously unclear, since it's evident that few human players manage to overcome this. If the "solution" to bad weather was truly to simply adopt a more direct style, it would've been found and adopted by the playerbase years ago.

There was a long post about playing in bad weather for FM07. Basically, stop with all the short passing and dribbling. As I recall, it was largely ignored.

Ched: how about condition? When does the AI score? Could their bad weather tactics be generally more condition efficient and thus chances near the end of the game are more likely to be scored due to a stamina/pace/strength advantage that they don't have in the rest of the season? That would begin to explain the jump in performance efficiency.

1- The way of adapting to bad weather is obviously unclear, since it's evident that few human players manage to overcome this. If the "solution" to bad weather was truly to simply adopt a more direct style, it would've been found and adopted by the playerbase years ago.

There was a long post about playing in bad weather for FM07. Basically, stop with all the short passing and dribbling. As I recall, it was largely ignored.

Ched: how about condition? When does the AI score? Could their bad weather tactics be generally more condition efficient and thus chances near the end of the game are more likely to be scored due to a stamina/pace/strength advantage that they don't have in the rest of the season? That would begin to explain the jump in performance efficiency.

It's more often than not (3 to 1) the first shot on target - which occurred withing the first 20mins or so.

So i would not think condition should be a factor - although that could explain why when going all out in the last 10mins, they aren't too effective.